Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Court defeats for ministers

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 24 January 2007
SCOTTISH ministers yesterday failed in the country's highest court to prevent the release of documents which had been sought under the Freedom of Information Act.
In two cases heard in the Court of Session, rulings against ministers by Kevin Dunion, the Scottish Information Commissioner, were upheld.

The cases involved information on why legislation passed in 1990, designed to promote competition in the provision of legal services, had not been brought into effect, and why ministers had decided in 2004 not to "call in" a planning application for a waste disposal and ecological conservation area at Treane Quarry, north Ayrshire.



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 23 January 2007 9:16 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Freedom of information
 
1

Peter Cherbi,

Edinburgh 24/01/2007 03:25:09

The legislation regarding legal services was not enacted because the legal profession & their insurers didn't want to open up their business markets or allow clients to be able to get legal representation in the courts to sue crooked lawyers.

Corruption, and lobbying from business interests to prevent pro consumer legislation .. nothing else.

2

George in Kansas (USA),

coffeyville, Kansas USA 24/01/2007 04:48:55

Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity.
Lord Acton (1834-1902), English historian. Letter, 23 Jan. 1861 (published in Lord Acton and his Circle, Letter 74, ed. by Abbot Gasquet, 1906).

One of the US Supreme court Justices observed, "sun light is the best disinfectant."

The publics’ business should always be done in public.

3

McPundit,

Lothians 24/01/2007 07:25:35

The Scottish FoI scheme was always claimed by the very Executive, which challenges its operation in court and tries to amend it by 'reviews' of its operation, to be more open than the UK FoI Act.

The law is yet again upheld by the judges, so let's hope the 'Scotsman' and other Scottish newspapers, ever eager to use FoI as a stick to beat the devolved institutions on issues such as expenses, hospitality etc, tell their readers more clearly about how the Westminster Parliament is not acting in the true spirit of openness.

Where are the detailed stories, equivalent, to those about Holyrood and the Executive, on
(a) the House of Commons' comprehensive defeat at the Information Tribunal, when it tried to appeal rulings by the UK Information Commissioner to release MP expenses details: http://www.informationtribunal.gov.uk/Files/ourDecisions/...? That ruling earlier this month made relevant comparisons with the Scottish law, and Holyrood practice (paras 26, 93);
(b) a Private Members Bill in the Commons, which received a purely formal, unopposed 2nd Reading last Friday, to exempt both Houses of Parliament from the UK FoI Act: http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm20...?

4

Peter Cherbi,

Edinburgh 24/01/2007 09:31:23

#3. McPundit, Lothians

Interesting link on the exemption of Westminster & the House of Lords .... we should be hearing a lot more of that one from the Press.

I wonder how much taxpayers money the Executive has spent on Richard Keen QC on these cases mentioned in the article today ....

.. and of even more interest are the motives in play here for refusing disclosure ... because it's to do with lawyers of course.

If it had been a member of the public trying to get legal representation to break loose a disclosure of papers relating to the restriction of legal markets, they wouldn't even have been able to secure legal representation - so Mr Alexander, the Herald newspaper, and the rest of us are lucky Mr Dunion was there to do it for us.

No such difficulty for the Scottish Executive though - the legal profession provided their best to defeat the FOI disclosure request (at top fees too no doubt), but m'luds felt a bit honest yesterday and found in favour, again, of FOI.

I hope there won't be a paper fiddling exercise going on at the Executive & Drumsheugh Gardens now over the disclosure ... as we all know these two institutions do love to leave out the documents which prove them crooked ....

5

Guga,

Rockall 24/01/2007 14:07:56

To seek to hide information from the public is deceitful and corrupt. However, what else could we expect from New Labour and it's numpties? Incidentally, how many of the numpties are lawyers?

As for that mob in Westminster, they've been lying to, and cheating the public for centuries. They are so riddled with sleaze and corruption, that they could probably outdo the Mafia.

6

Anthony,

Glasgow 24/01/2007 17:37:54

IF citizens are able to get their case to our highest courts, they have a pretty good record of doing the right thing. Labour and Liberal politicians have pandered to law officers however, in doing their damndest to block an inceasing number of people from getting that far. Especially the poor and vulnerable who need protection of the courts the most.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.